Park City Mountain is about to find out — for a second time — if it will be able to upgrade two of its most public-facing chairlifts.

Four years after the ski and snowboard resort was stymied in its initial effort to secure permits to replace its Eagle, Eaglet and Silverlode lifts, the Park City Planning Commission could rule on a new set of permit requests at its meeting Wednesday night. Public comment on both projects will be accepted at the meeting, which is set to begin at 5:30 p.m. at 445 Marsac Ave in Park City. The meeting is also available online.

This time around, Park City Mountain — which is owned by Colorado-based Vail Resorts — has split the permit requests. That means the Silverlode lift project or the Eagle lift project could move forward even if the other is not approved.

The Silverlode lift is located near the center of the resort, which has the most lift-served terrain in the country, and has become a key cog in moving skiers and snowboarders between the Canyons Village and Mountain Village bases. Park City Mountain has proposed expanding the lift from six passengers to eight and building a maintenance building adjacent to the lift.

The Eagle lift proposal would replace the existing Eagle and Eaglet lifts with a single chairlift with a midstation for offloading. The upper terminal will also be moved somewhat, which prompted a group of citizens to argue in 2022 that Park City Mountain’s plan did not conform with its development agreement with the town. That ultimately led to the denial of the permit by the commission and a series of lawsuits.

Commissioner John Frontero raised the specter of the reason the lifts were previously denied during a May 13 meeting. He asked Park City Mountain officials and lawyers for proof that increased uphill capacity would not lead to more crowded slopes. That relationship is determined by a formula called the Comfortable Carrying Capacity. The formula is proprietary and neither Vail Resorts nor the two firms that in 2022 independently calculated the Comfortable Carrying Capacity for the resort and the city have been willing to show their work.

“I would, for one, breathe a sigh of relief to see that type of report,” Frontero said. “That at least it was considered, and the resort acknowledged that it’s important, and that the community can be comfortable that this 15.56% increase in uphill capacity will not result in further, in perhaps unsafe, downhill conditions, and that there’s been an analysis done to verify that that will not happen.”

Following a challenge of the 2022 permit application, both a district and the state court of appeals affirmed that the planning commission has the right to know how Park City Mountain is calculating its Comfortable Carrying Capacity.

The Silverlode upgrade to an eight-person chair would, per Park City Mountain, increase uphill capacity by 20%, from 3,000 to 3,600 people per hour. The Eagle lift project, the resort reported, would increase capacity at that lift by about 55%, or 1,000 people per hour, and increase total carrying capacity at the Mountain Village base by roughly 16%.

A lawyer for Park City Mountain said the capacity calculations were key in 2022 because the resort applied for an expedited administrative conditional use permit. She said the standard permitting process already requires an in-depth look at a project, rendering calculations for Comfortable Carrying Capacity irrelevant.

City planners told the commissioners that an updated analysis of the carrying capacity is not required for approval of the permits.

Project critics disagree. In letters to the commission and comments made at the meeting, they nearly universally supported upgrading the lifts. However, they opposed doing so without following the tenants of the 1998 development agreement, which they said requires analysis and remediation of any potential negative consequences of changing lift capacity.

“The Commission,” wrote Frode Jensen, a Park Meadows resident, “cannot, and must not, ignore the ‘downhill’ consequences of ‘uphill’ upgrades.”

Resort officials said at the May 13 meeting that increased uphill capacity does not translate to increased visitation. They added that any potential negative impacts on skier numbers from the lift projects will be countered by the paid-parking reservation system that has been implemented at both bases in recent years.

“Based on industry experience and expert opinion, these projects are not expected to create an increase in visitation and therefore would not induce additional traffic and parking demand,” Park City Mountain Director of Mountain Planning Zach Perdue said,

The commission received more than 40 letters regarding the lift projects prior to Wednesday’s meeting. Most of them were in favor approving the projects.

“If Park City becomes known for its long lines and inability to park after paying top dollar, people will choose to go other places,” wrote Robert Fuller, a resident of the Snowflower condos that sit alongside the base of the Eagle lift.

In her letter, however, Park Meadows resident Liz Lee said approving the projects without guardrails is not in the best interest of Park City locals or visitors.

“It’s Vail ... who is the real benefactor here,” Lee wrote, “not our town or the skiers.”

Park City Mountain is currently upgrading its Cabriolet lift and last year installed the 10-person Sunrise gondola, which replaced a chairlift by the same name.